1. Field of the Invention
This invention pertains to the construction of restaurants and more particularly to an improved restaurant construction system for more promptly and more personally serving a relatively large number of restaurant patrons.
2. Description of the Related Art
U.S. Pat. No. 4,074,793 issued to the present inventor on Feb. 21, 1978 for a Restaurant Dining System ("793 Patent"). It discloses a restaurant dining system comprising dining and bar areas, a cocktail lounge, a kitchen and a raised order-taking post separate from the dining and bar areas. The order-taking post facilitates the prompt delivery of food and drink orders taken by telephone from patrons in the dining area and cocktail lounge in visual communication with the order-taking person. That patent discloses a table on which a telephone is positioned with a speaker mounted beneath the table top. Patrons use the telephone to communicate their orders to a person in the order-taking post who transmits the orders to the service bar or kitchen. The speaker permits music to be played at the table.
The same disclosure as the 793 Patent is in U.S. Pat. No. 4,184,050 issued to the present inventor on Jan. 15, 1980 for a Drink Service System, particularly for a bar noise control feature. The same disclosure is also in U.S. Pat. No. 4,306,388 issued to the present inventor on Dec. 22, 1981 for a Restaurant Entertainment System, particularly for a combined piano bar-bandstand which straddles the bar area and dance floor.
U.S. Pat. No. 4,518,821 issued to the present inventor on May 21, 1985 for a Restaurant Telephone Entertainment System ("821 Patent"). It discloses a combined telephone-speaker-lamp console for use on tables in a restaurant having a telephone ordering system of the type disclosed in the 793 Patent. The lamp blinks in response to telephone ringing current fed to the associated telephone. Each console has a cable of sufficient length to extend via a hole in the table supporting the console through a pedestal and past the pedestal's base to be plugged into the central cable system that runs under the carpeting and then be retracted beneath the base.
The same disclosure as the 821 Patent is in U.S. Pat. No. 4,694,486 issued to the present inventor on Sep. 15, 1987 for a Combined Telephone-Table System, particularly the cable retraction feature.
U.S. Pat. No. 4,800,438 issued to the present inventor on Jan. 24, 1989 for a Telephone Console for Restaurant Tables ("438 Patent"). It discloses an improved restaurant telephone console comprising a chassis mounted on a pipe support extending above a table. A lampshade support has a downwardly-extending side wall which goes over the chassis. A telephone is mounted on the top panel of the lampshade support. Other components--including a speaker, lamp bulbs, a chime and a pocket color TV set--are mounted on the chassis beneath the lampshade support. The lamp bulbs illuminate a portion of the table around the console. The patent also discloses a schematic electrical diagram of the console control system and associated audio and video components used to operate the console, and an alarm system to prevent theft of the phone.
The 793 Patent has dining table seating on one level with each seat in view of the raised order-taking post so that the order-taking person can see the patron while taking the patron's order. That visual contact is deemed by the inventor to be a very important feature of the restaurant dining system in order to provide a personal touch between the two. To expand the number of seats on the same level requires a corresponding increase in the base or footprint of the restaurant with a corresponding increase in construction and land occupancy cost. Moreover, the longer the distance between the order-taking post and the patron's table, the less personal is the visual contact, which is undesirable.
However, if a second floor is provided when constructing the restaurant to expand the number of seats on the same footprint and thus the profit, then an additional order-taking post is required for the second floor. That is undesirable because just a small overflow of patrons from the first floor would require an additional order-taking person for the second floor, and also some duplication of equipment would be required at increased capital cost.